cross-posted from: https://lemmy.cringecollective.io/post/5626
can't make this shit up
Serious question, does consuming a virus give a similar viral load as inhaling an equal amount?
this post was submitted on 15 May 2024
7 points (100.0% liked)
Memes
45159 readers
4140 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Assuming you mean viral load referring to mucuses or blood of the infected. Given that the human influenza virus' entry requires the viral surface proteins (hemagglutinin (HA)) to bind to acids present on respiratory epithelial cells along with cleavage of HA by host cell proteases (enzymes that breakdown proteins) to facilitate membrane fusion. These trypsin-like proteases are mainly expressed in airway tissues, restricting influenza viral tissue response to the respiratory tract. I would say it would be highly unlikely for influenza viral replication existing in an environment lacking this crucial interaction let alone a low-pH environment like the GI tract
What a long-winded, asinine answer. Using scientific jargon doesn't help communicate your meaning to the layman when you do not bother to actually explain the meaning of the jargon you use.
Put the effort in to explain the science properly. If you can't, then you don't know the subject well enough. If you won't, then you shouldn't be communicating science.
The pot said to the kettle. Your reply to this thread is much better presented, you how to communicate science. I think you need to think a bit more about your audience. Lemmy isn't an academic institution, it's removed posts all the way down.
I'm sure there's some hypocrisy in my replies, but that's not going to stop me from doing the same again. I've worked with scientists for a long time and the way most of them communicate is a pet peeve of mine.
I've thought about this for a while to be sure I'm not just being reactive. I wouldn't ask you to stop, in fact I encourage you to post more. I can't find the time to write such well written replies. Your post is the type of content I like to see and I'm sure others do too.
I'm giving you an unsolicited critique of your comments. If you intend to communicate with laymen about scientific concepts from my experience you're going to have a lot more success approaching it as if you're a supportive teacher rather than trying to prove someone wrong. If you try to be more like Ms. Frizzle than Sheldon Cooper you might reach more people, which is the ultimate goal of communicating science to laymen.
You are actually very good at it, and I encourage you to practice and find what works and what doesn't. Proving someone wrong just makes them defensive, teaching someone or communicating with the public shouldn't make them feel the need to be defensive.
That's a fascinating question. I'd love to hear from an actual epidemiologist.
That's totally how human to human transmission is going to start.
Good news! The mortality rate is so high it's unlikely to spread as far as COVID!
Easy to point the finger at everyone doing this, but every person who continues buying and consuming animal products are still most primarily to blame for this situation.
If this does become a new pandemic, we might be talking about an unprecedented ~50% of the human population killed. A real life Thanos event. Thanks omnivores.
I happen to think Militant Vegans should be eaten or composted but even I will agree that your first sentence is broadly correct. Industrialized agriculture and CAFO operations are to blame for this so you can generally say that consuming animal products is to blame.
Your second point is highly speculative and not based on any factual evidence. The speculated worst case scenario seems to be maybe 20x COVID-19, or 140 million worldwide.
As a vegan, I should think you'd celebrate even that high rate of attrition. It would mean, overall, far fewer delicious animals being consumed.